Hi everyone! I have been working on idea for an application framework in ruby the wraps around the wx ruby gem. The goal is to make a framework that is as easy as rails create applications using concise and dry ruby code. We are in need of some experienced help! If you are interested checkout the project on ruby forge. Anvil.rubyforge.com and the irc channel is #rubyanvil on irc . My buck on irc is d2dchat. I look forward to all the input everyone could provide! -Lance Carlson Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
just forwarding this conversation to the list as it should be published! :) Hi mate Lance Carlson wrote:> It is going well, (although I could use some help)Looks like you''re really making progress. I''m pretty maxed out with core wxRuby development, but don''t hesitate to ask for help on the dev list. There''s a lot of indicators of increasing interest in wxRuby over the past 12 months, so once you''re ready, I''d say a good-looking offer on the ruby mailing list might well draw in some developers.> I''ve got MVC setup, > though I''m not sure exactly if the way I''ve done the MVC is the best > way to do it. I''ve also been extending all of the wxruby classes to > make them more ruby-esk and also created a :render option inside all > of the methods so you can do the rails equivalent of partials.I don''t know a huge amount about MVC and have only used rails for toy applications (though I used to be web dev, before rails existed...). So I probably can''t help much here.> The > problem I think though is that views in application development are > not used so much and I think more and more people are using GUIs to > take care of interfaces.. is this a correct assumption or should I > continue to extend wx ruby to include this new syntax?I kind of like where that it is going, though it''s quite a paradigm jump from core wxRuby ... but ...> If there is a need for a purely coded way to create views than I will > continue my extension of wx::ruby for views with an :xml => option > available, but otherwise I will just use wx''s XML exclusively.I think you''re right that it''s increasing popular to use IDEs to design GUI interfaces. From that, I would say there''s a really big win in making Wx''s XRC interface much more ruby-ish. All that find_element_by_id etc is clumsy. If there was a nice "DSLish" way to load an XRC file, and attach event handlers and behaviours to the elements initially designed in an IDE and stored in XRC, that would be very interesting.> Once > this interface decision is decided (I could use some input from > everyone on this list)(btw, this isn''t on the list)> I will continue to build out hamr using the > anvil framework and include examples on what I did to create the > application.Totally agree that''s the best way to develop the framework - through trying to build an app. That''s where almost everything that''s now part of wxSugar came from - ideas initially developed in relation to Weft QDA.> I can see a lot of the things I''m doing helping out the > wx::ruby community a great deal and almost feel like parts of the > framework should be integrated into wx::sugar or wx::ruby. Thoughts? >Yes, additions to wxSugar would be very welcome. The normal way is to submit diff patches on the wxruby-development list. all the best alex ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Lance Carlson <lancecarlson at gmail.com> Date: Aug 29, 2007 6:04 PM Subject: Re: Anvil: an application framework To: Alex Fenton <alex at pressure.to> It is going well, (although I could use some help) I''ve got MVC setup, though I''m not sure exactly if the way I''ve done the MVC is the best way to do it. I''ve also been extending all of the wxruby classes to make them more ruby-esk and also created a :render option inside all of the methods so you can do the rails equivalent of partials. The problem I think though is that views in application development are not used so much and I think more and more people are using GUIs to take care of interfaces.. is this a correct assumption or should I continue to extend wx ruby to include this new syntax? (an example of the syntax can be found on my blog here: http://grasprubyonrails.com/2007/8/16/mvc-support-and-view-rendering-in-anvil). If there is a need for a purely coded way to create views than I will continue my extension of wx::ruby for views with an :xml => option available, but otherwise I will just use wx''s XML exclusively. Once this interface decision is decided (I could use some input from everyone on this list) I will continue to build out hamr using the anvil framework and include examples on what I did to create the application. On agenda after that will be an anvil generator that will automatically create the files necessary to get going with an anvil application. I can see a lot of the things I''m doing helping out the wx::ruby community a great deal and almost feel like parts of the framework should be integrated into wx::sugar or wx::ruby. Thoughts? Suggestions? Criticisms? On 8/29/07, Alex Fenton <alex at pressure.to> wrote:> Hi Lance > > How''s it going? Be interested to hear at some point more about your > ideas for Anvil. > > Just to let you know that I moved the Anvil info on the wxRuby wiki from > the front page to here: > http://wxruby.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.pl?OnlineCodeExamples > > This is simply because at obviously Anvil is right now at a very early > stage in development with no releases or documentation. As it matures > and gains acceptance I''d be happy to feature it more prominently. > > best wishes > alex > > lancecarlson at gmail.com wrote: > > Hi everyone! I have been working on idea for an application framework in ruby the wraps around the wx ruby gem. The goal is to make a framework that is as easy as rails create applications using concise and dry ruby code. We are in need of some experienced help! If you are interested checkout the project on ruby forge. Anvil.rubyforge.com and the irc channel is #rubyanvil on irc . My buck on irc is d2dchat. I look forward to all the input everyone could provide! > > > > -Lance Carlson > > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile > > > > _______________________________________________ > > wxruby-users mailing list > > wxruby-users at rubyforge.org > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wxruby-users > > > >
Hey Alex Me:> > The > > problem I think though is that views in application development are > > not used so much and I think more and more people are using GUIs to > > take care of interfaces.. is this a correct assumption or should I > > continue to extend wx ruby to include this new syntax?Alex:> I kind of like where that it is going, though it''s quite a paradigm jump > from core wxRuby ... but ...Me:> > If there is a need for a purely coded way to create views than I will > > continue my extension of wx::ruby for views with an :xml => option > > available, but otherwise I will just use wx''s XML exclusively.Alex:> I think you''re right that it''s increasing popular to use IDEs to design > GUI interfaces. From that, I would say there''s a really big win in > making Wx''s XRC interface much more ruby-ish. All that > find_element_by_id etc is clumsy. If there was a nice "DSLish" way to > load an XRC file, and attach event handlers and behaviours to the > elements initially designed in an IDE and stored in XRC, that would be > very interesting.So does that mean that you think I should continue building out my DSL or I should shift my focus on creating the framework to wrap our Wx''s XRC XML? On 8/30/07, Lance Carlson <lancecarlson at gmail.com> wrote:> just forwarding this conversation to the list as it should be published! :) > > Hi mate > > Lance Carlson wrote: > > It is going well, (although I could use some help) > Looks like you''re really making progress. I''m pretty maxed out with core > wxRuby development, but don''t hesitate to ask for help on the dev list. > > There''s a lot of indicators of increasing interest in wxRuby over the > past 12 months, so once you''re ready, I''d say a good-looking offer on > the ruby mailing list might well draw in some developers. > > > I''ve got MVC setup, > > though I''m not sure exactly if the way I''ve done the MVC is the best > > way to do it. I''ve also been extending all of the wxruby classes to > > make them more ruby-esk and also created a :render option inside all > > of the methods so you can do the rails equivalent of partials. > I don''t know a huge amount about MVC and have only used rails for toy > applications (though I used to be web dev, before rails existed...). So > I probably can''t help much here. > > > The > > problem I think though is that views in application development are > > not used so much and I think more and more people are using GUIs to > > take care of interfaces.. is this a correct assumption or should I > > continue to extend wx ruby to include this new syntax? > I kind of like where that it is going, though it''s quite a paradigm jump > from core wxRuby ... but ... > > If there is a need for a purely coded way to create views than I will > > continue my extension of wx::ruby for views with an :xml => option > > available, but otherwise I will just use wx''s XML exclusively. > I think you''re right that it''s increasing popular to use IDEs to design > GUI interfaces. From that, I would say there''s a really big win in > making Wx''s XRC interface much more ruby-ish. All that > find_element_by_id etc is clumsy. If there was a nice "DSLish" way to > load an XRC file, and attach event handlers and behaviours to the > elements initially designed in an IDE and stored in XRC, that would be > very interesting. > > Once > > this interface decision is decided (I could use some input from > > everyone on this list) > (btw, this isn''t on the list) > > I will continue to build out hamr using the > > anvil framework and include examples on what I did to create the > > application. > Totally agree that''s the best way to develop the framework - through > trying to build an app. That''s where almost everything that''s now part > of wxSugar came from - ideas initially developed in relation to Weft QDA. > > I can see a lot of the things I''m doing helping out the > > wx::ruby community a great deal and almost feel like parts of the > > framework should be integrated into wx::sugar or wx::ruby. Thoughts? > > > Yes, additions to wxSugar would be very welcome. The normal way is to > submit diff patches on the wxruby-development list. > > all the best > alex > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Lance Carlson <lancecarlson at gmail.com> > Date: Aug 29, 2007 6:04 PM > Subject: Re: Anvil: an application framework > To: Alex Fenton <alex at pressure.to> > > > It is going well, (although I could use some help) I''ve got MVC setup, > though I''m not sure exactly if the way I''ve done the MVC is the best > way to do it. I''ve also been extending all of the wxruby classes to > make them more ruby-esk and also created a :render option inside all > of the methods so you can do the rails equivalent of partials. The > problem I think though is that views in application development are > not used so much and I think more and more people are using GUIs to > take care of interfaces.. is this a correct assumption or should I > continue to extend wx ruby to include this new syntax? (an example of > the syntax can be found on my blog here: > http://grasprubyonrails.com/2007/8/16/mvc-support-and-view-rendering-in-anvil). > If there is a need for a purely coded way to create views than I will > continue my extension of wx::ruby for views with an :xml => option > available, but otherwise I will just use wx''s XML exclusively. Once > this interface decision is decided (I could use some input from > everyone on this list) I will continue to build out hamr using the > anvil framework and include examples on what I did to create the > application. On agenda after that will be an anvil generator that will > automatically create the files necessary to get going with an anvil > application. I can see a lot of the things I''m doing helping out the > wx::ruby community a great deal and almost feel like parts of the > framework should be integrated into wx::sugar or wx::ruby. Thoughts? > Suggestions? Criticisms? > > On 8/29/07, Alex Fenton <alex at pressure.to> wrote: > > Hi Lance > > > > How''s it going? Be interested to hear at some point more about your > > ideas for Anvil. > > > > Just to let you know that I moved the Anvil info on the wxRuby wiki from > > the front page to here: > > http://wxruby.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.pl?OnlineCodeExamples > > > > This is simply because at obviously Anvil is right now at a very early > > stage in development with no releases or documentation. As it matures > > and gains acceptance I''d be happy to feature it more prominently. > > > > best wishes > > alex > > > > lancecarlson at gmail.com wrote: > > > Hi everyone! I have been working on idea for an application framework in ruby the wraps around the wx ruby gem. The goal is to make a framework that is as easy as rails create applications using concise and dry ruby code. We are in need of some experienced help! If you are interested checkout the project on ruby forge. Anvil.rubyforge.com and the irc channel is #rubyanvil on irc . My buck on irc is d2dchat. I look forward to all the input everyone could provide! > > > > > > -Lance Carlson > > > Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > wxruby-users mailing list > > > wxruby-users at rubyforge.org > > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wxruby-users > > > > > > > >
Lance Carlson wrote:>> I think you''re right that it''s increasing popular to use IDEs to design >> GUI interfaces. From that, I would say there''s a really big win in >> making Wx''s XRC interface much more ruby-ish. All that >> find_element_by_id etc is clumsy. If there was a nice "DSLish" way to >> load an XRC file, and attach event handlers and behaviours to the >> elements initially designed in an IDE and stored in XRC, that would be >> very interesting. >> > > So does that mean that you think I should continue building out my DSL > or I should shift my focus on creating the framework to wrap our Wx''s > XRC XML?I think you should work on whatever you see as the biggest blocks to slick, easy application development in wxRuby at the moment. Others here who use wxRuby might well have views, and the dev team welcomes patches to improve the API. But improving wxRuby''s XML/XRC API is something that''s not being worked on at the moment; ''is there a good IDE / RAD solution for ruby GUI?'' is a frequently asked question on comp.lang.ruby; and all the current wxRuby visual IDEs depend on XRC. So I think you could have some impact there. I haven''t used them, but others have stated that some of the GUI builders for wxWidgets are excellent - eg DialogBlocks. best alex PS - I don''t mind at all here - but as a general rule it''s probably netiquette to ask before reposting an off-list discussion
I think that wxGlade, a python based widget editor is pretty good. It doesn''t generate ruby code, but it does generate XRC which is parsable by wx::ruby I assume. i will take a look into wx::ruby''s XML/XRC API and implement changes I think should be made to it in Anvil and will let you decide if you want to push off that functionality into Wx::Ruby. As for my netiquette, I wasn''t thinking and I''m sorry :). I assumed our discussion was pretty important for the list. Even announcements of making changes to the wx::ruby wiki should be public IMO and I think your reasons for doing so are justified thus person memos are unnecessary. In the future however, if you email me directly I will remember to ask before I post! -regards, -Lance On 8/30/07, Alex Fenton <alex at pressure.to> wrote:> Lance Carlson wrote: > >> I think you''re right that it''s increasing popular to use IDEs to design > >> GUI interfaces. From that, I would say there''s a really big win in > >> making Wx''s XRC interface much more ruby-ish. All that > >> find_element_by_id etc is clumsy. If there was a nice "DSLish" way to > >> load an XRC file, and attach event handlers and behaviours to the > >> elements initially designed in an IDE and stored in XRC, that would be > >> very interesting. > >> > > > > So does that mean that you think I should continue building out my DSL > > or I should shift my focus on creating the framework to wrap our Wx''s > > XRC XML? > I think you should work on whatever you see as the biggest blocks to > slick, easy application development in wxRuby at the moment. Others here > who use wxRuby might well have views, and the dev team welcomes patches > to improve the API. > > But improving wxRuby''s XML/XRC API is something that''s not being worked > on at the moment; ''is there a good IDE / RAD solution for ruby GUI?'' is > a frequently asked question on comp.lang.ruby; and all the current > wxRuby visual IDEs depend on XRC. So I think you could have some impact > there. > > I haven''t used them, but others have stated that some of the GUI > builders for wxWidgets are excellent - eg DialogBlocks. > > best > alex > > PS - I don''t mind at all here - but as a general rule it''s probably > netiquette to ask before reposting an off-list discussion > _______________________________________________ > wxruby-users mailing list > wxruby-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/wxruby-users >